Hick Planet magazine
tryna find the grownups table on a hick planet
an unperiodical:
on arts, endeavors, musings, sites, sights, & other senses
Sunday, 2021 January 17th
issue 9

the party paradigms in US governance history
The 1st Three-quarter Century
the 1st and 2nd party paradigms

an overview with  the editors

The first American president never had to run for office.   George Washington was so popular and generally so trusted by the public throughout the country, that in each of the first two elections, the Electoral College chose him with a hundred percent of the vote.

He didn’t trust or support the activities of political parties, barely conceding grudgingly to any use at all for their existence, as can be heard in excerpts from his presidential retirement letter of September 19, 1796, to the American citizenry.

This notwithstanding, two parties that would come to dominate US politics had already started to be organized within Washington’s first term, predominantly by members of his own cabinet.

Alexander Hamilton, who was the country’s first secretary of the treasury, is credited with being the driving force in founding the first political party, the Federalists.

He wanted a strong national government with financial stability and credibility; a key example of this was to have the federal government take on the debt that each of the states had gone into during the American Revolution, along with programs and processes for raising the money to pay these off.

Merchants and bankers tended to be strong backers of these policies.   So the party had stronger support in urban areas.   The Federalists favored support for increased manufacturing and for modernization and for developing a more centralized national government rather than strong state governments.   In foreign affairs, with the French Revolution having broken out just as the new US government was coming into being, they were against it and leaned instead towards stronger relations with Great Britain.

Not long after the Federalist Party was created, Thomas Jefferson, the secretary of state, and James Madison, a close advisor of Washington’s in the Congress, led in the founding of what were usually referred to as the Republicans, occasionally as the Democrats, and eventually came to be called the Democratic-Republican Party.

Decades later, Jefferson summed up his view on political factions and parties in a letter [*12]:

Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties.
1.   Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes.
2dly.   Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest & safe, altho’ not the most wise depository of the public interests.
In every country these two parties exist, and in every one where they are free to think, speak, and write, they will declare themselves.   Call them therefore liberals and serviles, Jacobins and Ultras, whigs and tories, republicans and federalists, aristocrats and democrats, or by whatever name you please, they are the same parties still and pursue the same object.   The last appellation of aristocrats and democrats is the true one expressing the essence of all.

The Democratic-Republicans were in favor of agrarianism—by which they meant support for small farmers and poor peasants as opposed to rich, industrial urbanites—and of republicanism—by which they meant that there would be no aristocracy or hereditary political power but instead with all people (which at the time, they considered to be male whites of northwestern European ancestry) being the source of all authority and being guaranteed freedom and inalienable individual rights—and of expansionism.   In foreign affairs, they tended to distrust stronger relations with Britain, which they considered to be too aristocratic, and, even after the outbreak of the French Revolution, to support strong ties with France, at least up until when Napolean came to power.

By the beginning of the fourth Congress, halfway through Washington’s second term, party identities had taken shape, and as can be seen in the graph [*15] [*17], the Federalists dominated in the Senate, while the Democratic-Republicans were stronger in the House of Representatives.

In the next election two years later, John Adams, who had been vice-president in both of Washington’s terms, ran for president on the Federalist ticket, and Jefferson was the Democratic-Republican candidate.   Adams won in a fairly tight election; this made Jefferson the vice-president; the Federalists also increased their dominance in the Senate, and they took over control of the House from the Democratic-Republicans.   They maintained this through the second half of the Adams administration.

In the following presidential election, John Adams was one of two Federalist candidates and Jefferson one of two Democratic-Republicans running.   Both Federalists got a minority of the votes, and Jefferson got a majority in a tie with the other Democratic-Republican candidate.   For the first time, the Electoral College was deadlocked and unable to choose a president, and so the House had to decide.   They also deadlocked and did so repeatedly 35 times.   Finally on the 36th ballot, the House elected Jefferson, and his Democratic-Republican running mate became vice-president.

These events, along with the experience of having had Jefferson and Adams, from opposing parties, serve as vice-president and president during the Adams administration brought about the passage of the 12th Amendment (only the second time the US Constitution was changed after the inclusion of the Bill of Rights), which came into effect before there was another presidential election.

This set in place the modern method for electing the president and vice-president.   And with Jefferson chosen to be the president, it was gonna be the first time that a president from one party would pass the presidency on to someone from an opposing party.   This led to speculation that Adams wouldn’t do so but would use his power as president to remain in office.   John Adams did give up the office without incident, there was a peaceful transfer of power, and the transition can be thought of as being completed from having had no political parties in US governance to having the first party paradigm (often referred to as the first party system) well established as a two-party system, with the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans as the major two parties comprising it.

The First 2 Party Paradigms in US Governance History Insomuch as there is generally not any one particular event that demarcates the end or beginning of a party paradigm or of a transition from one to another, and as there are also differing assessments as to their time frames, all indications of the dates of these beginnings or ends are only approximations. Electoral College vote percentages (of at least 5%), followed by popular vote percentages (of at least 10%) beginning when at least 70% of the states were conducting popular voting (1824) (Parenthetical numbers indicate the vote percentages in those elections when the Electoral College deadlocked and was unable to choose a president: 1800 and 1824.) the party of the president the party percentages (of at least 10%) in Congress: the Senate the House 100% 1788 1789 ’90 ’91 100% ’92 ’93 1794 ’95 65.6% 34.4% 55.7% 44.3% 51.1% 48.9% ’96 ’97 71.0% 29.0% 52.8% 47.2% ’98 1799 65.6% 34.4% 53.3% 46.7% (46.4%) (47.1%) (52.9%) (52.9%) 1800 ’01 54.8% 45.2% 63.8% 36.2% ’02 ’03 73.5% 26.5% 72.1% 27.9% 92.0% 8.0% 1804 ’05 78.8% 21.2% 80.0% 20.0% ’06 ’07 82.4% 17.6% 81.0% 19.0% 69.7% 26.9% ’08 1809 76.5% 23.5% 66.0% 34.0% ’10 ’11 80.6% 19.4% 74.6% 25.4% 59.0% 41.0% ’12 ’13 71.4% 28.6% 63.2% 36.8% 1814 ’15 65.8% 34.2% 65.4% 34.6% 84.3% 15.7% ’16 ’17 70.0% 30.0% 78.3% 21.7% ’18 1819 82.6% 17.4% 85.2% 14.8% 99.6% ’20 ’21 91.5% 83.2% 16.8% ’22 ’23 /> 89.6% 10.4% /> 88.7% 11.3% (14.2%) (15.7%) (32.2%) (37.9%) (13.0%) (11.2%) (30.9%) (41.4%) 1824 ’25 54.2% 45.8% 51.2% 48.8% ’26 ’27 55.3% 44.7% 53.3% 46.7% 68.2% 31.8% 56.4% 43.6% ’28 1829 53.2% 46.8% 63.7% 34.0% ’30 ’31 51.1% 46.8% 60.4% 29.7% 76.0% 17.0% 54.2% 37.4% ’32 ’33 54.2% 41.7% 60.1% 26.1% 1834 ’35 59.6% 36.5% 57.7% 32.8% 57.8% 24.8% 8.8% 50.8% 36.6% ’36 ’37 68.6% 31.4% 51.3% 44.2% ’38 1839 55.8% 44.2% 51.0% 46.1% 79.6% 20.4% 52.9% 46.8% ’40 ’41 59.2% 40.8% 57.7% 41.9% ’42 ’43 52.9% 45.1% 63.2% 35.0% 61.8% 38.2% 49.5% 48.1% 1844 ’45 55.4% 42.9% 62.8% 34.5% ’46 ’47 63.3% 35.0% 50.4% 47.8% 56.2% 43.8% 47.3% 42.5% 10.1% ’48 1849 58.1% 38.7% 49.6% 45.7% ’50 ’51 61.7% 37.7% 54.7% 36.8% 85.8% 14.2% 50.8% 43.9% ’52 ’53 61.7% 28.3% 66.7% 31.6% 1854 ’55 64.5% 32.3% 42.2% 35.2% 22.7% 58.8% 38.5% 45.3% 33.1% 21.5% ’56 ’57 63.6% 30.3% 54.9% 38.8% ’58 1859 49.1% 47.2% 54.8% 28.1% 59.4% 23.8% 12.9% 39.8% 18.1% 12.6% 29.5% ’60 ’61 62.5% 22.9% 14.6% 57.7% 24.2% ’62 ’63 66.0% 20.0% 45.9% 39.3% 1864 the transition from no parties to the 1st party paradigm the 1st party paradigm the transition from the 1st to the 2nd party paradigm the 2nd party paradigm the transition from the 2nd to the 3rd party paradigm no party affiliation (George Washington, 1788-1797) the Federalist Party 1791-1824 the Democratic-Republican Party 1792-1824 the Jacksonian faction 1825-1829 the anti-Jacksonian faction 1825-1837 the Democratic Party 1828-the present the National Republican Party 1830-1834 the Whig Party 1833-1856 the “Know Nothing” Party (the Native American Party) 1844-1860 the Free Soil Party 1848-1854 the Unionist Party (the Unconditional Union Party) 1852-1866 the opposition coalition 1854-1858 the Republican Party 1854-the present the Constitutional Union Party 1860-1861 the “Southern” Democratic Party 1860

In this first party paradigm of the American two-party system, the Democratic-Republicans totally dominated.   They controlled both the House and Senate in the next dozen Congresses; the Federalists eventually had hardly 10 percent in each house in Congress, sometimes not even that much.

The Democratic-Republicans won every presidential election in a crushing landslide.   The Federalists, in fact, were only able to even field any presidential candidate in three of the elections.   In the 1812 election, two Democratic-Republicans ran against each other.   There were three two-term presidents in a row; this is so rare that there’s only been one other time in American history when there’ve been even two two-term presidents in a row, and it didn’t happen again for two centuries, when there were again three in a row (with Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama).   And this is the only time when all three in a row have been in the same party (with Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and James Monroe).   When Monroe ran for reelection, he came within one electoral vote of winning unanimously.

The Federalist Party had essentially collapsed as a political force.

The 1824 election is the first one in which there was no candidate from the revolutionary generation.   Four candidates each got more than 10 percent of the vote.   They were all in the Democratic-Republican Party.   Each of them also got more than 10 percent of the popular vote.   (This is the first election in which at least 70 percent of the states even conducted popular voting for president and therefore the first for which we take a measure of that.)   Andrew Jackson got the most electoral votes, almost 38 percent, and John Quincy Adams came in second with just over 32 percent.   So for the second time, and the only time so far other than in 1800, the Electoral College deadlocked, and again the House had to choose the next predident.

They picked Adams.

While he and Jackson had been in the same party, they were really in very separate factions.   It had really become a one-party system, and because of this, the party had not been able to give a focused voice to any of its differing constituent factions.   The overwhelmingly successful Democratic-Republican Party had become as useless as the hugely unsuccessful Federalist Party.

The transition to some new party paradigm of this two-party system was now underway.

The members of the 19th Congress, who took office when Adams did as president, were now identified as parts of these two factions.   There was significantly greater competitive balance than there had been in quite some time.   Those affiliated with Jackson were, naturally enough, called things like Jackson men or Jacksonians or Jacksonian democrats.   Those affiliated with President Adams, including one of his allies, Henry Clay, were called things like Adams-Clay republicans or Adams’s men or anti-Jacksonians.

In the 1828 election, Adams and Jackson again ran against each other.   On the 8th day of January of that year, Jackson’s supporters had founded a new party in Baltimore.   (It is considered to be the oldest continually active political party in the world.)   They called it the Democratic Party.   It essentially took up advocacy for the issues espoused by Jefferson and Madison when founding the Democratic-Republican Party, and it generally considers itself the direct successor to that party (for many decades, Jefferson-Jackson dinners—named for their reputed founders—were, and still to this day in many parts of the country are, the biggest annual events held to raise funds for the party).

This time, while running on their ticket, Jackson won (big!).   His supporters, under the banner of this new party, maintained control of the Senate and gained even greater dominance in the House.

After Adams’s loss in this presidential election, the anti-Jacksonians began to operate under the identity of the National Republican Party, basically continuing to advocate for nationalistic modernization and economic development to build up harmony and unity throughout the country.   They nominated Clay as their candidate to oppose Jackson when he ran for reelection.   Clay also lost to Jackson, but the National Republicans took decisive control of the Senate in that election.   The competitive viability of these two factions as political adversaries could be seen, and the transition to the second party paradigm of the American two-party system can now be said to have been accomplished.

After Clay’s loss in this presidential election, the anti-Jacksonians began again to try to craft a new party identity to operate under.   While still advocating the same basic platform, they formed this new party as a coalition, along with National Republicans, of other factions and smaller parties.   It was named the Whig Party.

These were the two major parties from the late 1830s through the early 1850s.   And the Whigs were competitive with the Democrats.   Their candidates for president were elected twice, and they occasionally took control of the House or the Senate or both.

As the country continued to expand to the west though, an inevitable specter came ever more to the fore: the expansion of slavery into new territories and states.

    THE READER IS INVITED TO TAKE NOTE OF THIS MESSAGE









                                                      




                                            Food Not Bombs



"A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."
  —Martin Luther King, Jr.






                                 With over a billion people going hungry each day, how can we spend another dollar on war?



                                 Food Not Bombs is active around the world.   Find out what you can do in your community.





                                                                                                              http://foodnotbombs.net


                                                                                                                                                          1-800-884-1136



  The Missouri Compromise was a federal law passed in 1820.   The latitude line that today forms the northernmost border of Texas and forms the northernmost border of Arkansas was used to create a compromise regarding slavery in America west of the Mississippi.   The law banned allowing slavery anywhere north of this line, with the exception that Missouri, which is almost completely north of this line would be allowed to become a new state and that it would be a slave state.   A third of a century later, this restriction was repealed, making it possible for new slave states to be formed north of this line.   As had to have been expected, Northerners, especially those in the Midwest, who would be most affected, were outraged.

On the 20th day of March 1854, three dozen or so activists proposing that a party be founded to oppose this, and suggesting a name for the new party, gathered at a tiny school house in a little town in Wisconsin called Ripon.   The name they proposed was the Republican Party.   The idea was spread throughout Northern states, and within three and a half months, this new political party held its first convention in a town about 70 miles west of Detroit.

  This was just one of a number of new parties that had formed or were beginning to be formed, and the expansion of slavery into new territories was just one of a number of issues that were arising.   There were multiple reasons why the Whigs were becoming less relevant and also less able to keep cohesive throughout different parts of the country.   By 1854, the Whig Party was disintegrating.

As we know, the country itself was disintegrating.   And the political party landscape was now barreling toward a new paradigm.

Though there were several parties vying to be an alternative, in the 1856 presidential election, this new Republican Party was the only one other than the Democrats to get at least 10 percent of the electoral vote.   They had become the alternative.   In the 1860 election, their candidate, Abraham Lincoln, won in a landslide, and the country came apart; the Civil War had begun.   By 1864, it was fairly clear that the Confederacy could not win.   A huge part of the Democratic Party’s constituency was in the South; it had become the party determined to maintain slavery.   And the new paradigm of the US two-party system was set.   The Republican Party was gonna be the party of the victorious Union establishment.   And the Democratic Party was gonna be the party of the defeated Rebellion dragged back unwillingly into being a part of the United States.

The 2nd Three-quarter Century: the 3rd and 4th party paradigms

[ graph by the editor ]

home   cover   contents   archives   indices   masthead

Copyright 2021 The Cool Publication Company.